Zero Tolerance Policing and the Experience of New York City
1
It recent years there has been considerable lauding of the New York experience in reducing
crime through zero tolerance policing approaches. This paper is a critical examination of
some the issues which have emerged in relation to zero tolerance policing in New York.
The concept of zero tolerance is ambiguous. As one commentator noted it is 'a soundbite
term regularly used by the media and politicians' (Burke 1998:12). It has been defined as a
generic expression to cover a variety of 'proactive, confident, assertive policing strategies'
(Burke 1998: 12). Of course such a definition is itself so overly generalised as to be virtually
useless. Some of the advocates of what is referred to as a zero tolerance approach such as
George Kelling and William Bratton have in fact disassociated themselves from the term
'zero tolerance' (Wadham 1998:49). 'Zero tolerance policing' is no doubt favoured as a
political slogan precisely because of its populist appeal and inherent ambiguity.
Zero tolerance policing is said to begin in New York during the 1990s under Police
Commissioner Bratton and Mayor Guiliani. Guiliani was elected Mayor in 1993 and
Bratton was appointed as Commissioner soon after. Guiliani's electoral campaign had
centred around 'reclaiming the streets' of New York.
As Greene ( 1999) has noted 'reclaiming the streets' was only one of six crime strategies
which Bratton developed. The others involved reducing youth violence, domestic violence,
auto-related crime, drug dealing and the numbers of guns on the streets. However, 'cracking
down hard on the most visible symbols of urban disorder proved to be a powerful political
tool for bolstering Guiliani's image as a highly effective mayor' (Greene 1999:3).
Reclaiming the streets through a focus on 'quality of life' offences became the hallmark of
how zero tolerance policing was understood in New York.
An important element in zero tolerance policing has been the use of CornpStat - a
computerised managerial system. According to Bratton it is based on four principles:
accurate and timely intelligence; rapid deployment of personnel and resources; effective
tactics; and relentkss follow-up and assessment. The current Police Commissioner, Safir.
has described CompStat as a 'crime management tool which uses weekly crime statistics,
computer mapping and intensive strategy sessions to direct the implementation of crime
fighting strategie5' (cited in Burke 1998:20). There is clearly considerable pressure placed
on borough and precinct commanders to achieve. reductions in crime within their areas. 2
Nicholl (1997) has noted however, that the performance by which commanders are judged
2
Research assistance was provided by Zena Dabboussy. Thanks to Penny Andrews, Rick Curtis, Judith
Greene, Sid Haring and Rebecca Peters in New York City. Sections of this paper were part of a larger report
prepared for the Law and Justice Section of Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander Commission (ATSIC).
'CompStat operates by the police commanders ... giving periodical briefings to the senior management of the
NYPD. These take place in the central commanrl room of the Department which is set out like a wartime
operations centre. The management team sit around a horseshoe-shaped desk while the borough commander
stands in the middle. The crime statistics for the borough are displayed on screens behind the commander
whether they want them or not. The statistics ... are selected by the management team ... There is one
Comp Stat meeting a week and the borough commanders do not know which of them are going to be called to
give a briefing ... There is little doubt that these often "bmtal" periodical interrogations ... by NYPD senior
management in an environment that resembles a wartime operations centre have provided sufficient
motivation to achieve success in the fight against crime' (Burke 1998:20). See also Silverman (1998:59).
300
CURRENT ISSUES IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE
VOLUME 10 NUMBER 3
are 'numbers': the number of street searches, the number of high rise searches (verticals),
the number of summons, the number of arrests, the number of warrants executed, and so
forth.
A further component of zero tolerance policing has been significant increases in police
strength. Between 1990 and 1996 the number of officers in the NYPD grew significantly
from around 30,000 to over 38,000. There is a proposal to increase the department by a
further 1,900 officers during the 1998/1999 fiscal year which would bring the total strength
to 40,210 officer - a 25% increase over the number of officers in 1990 (IBO 1998).
The NYPD emphasised more minor 'quality of life' crimes, such as graffiti, vagrancy,
begging, 'squeegee' windshield washing, subway turnstile-jumping, illegal vending, streetlevel drug dealing and street prostitution. These offences were pursued to demonstrate
'control' of the streets. Bratton had previously been Chief of the New York Transit Police
and embarked on 'quality of life' policing program which had seen large scale arrests of
people for fare evasion. As Greene (1999) has noted, what Bratton embarked on as Police
Commissioner was in some ways a traditional law enforcement 'crack down' on local
crime: arrest and gaoling of low-level drug offenders, picking up school age youth for
truanting, aggressive use of stop and search powers, warrant checks and arrest of those
caught violating even minor public order laws.
During the initial period of zero tolerance policing between 1993 and 1996 arrests
increased by 23%. The type of arrests reflected the strategy of targeting low level public
order offences and minor drug offences - arrests for misdemeanours rose by 40% and arrests
for misdemeanour drug offences rose by 97%. By way of contrast, arrests for more serious
offences (felonies) rose by 5% during the same period (Greene 1999).
A significant part of zero tolerance policing has also involved attempts at regulating
various aspects of public expression. In particular this has involved refusals to permit
processions, marches and rallies. There have been a number of Federal court cases
challenging Police Commissioner Safir (who replaced Bratton) over violations of the First
Amendment. These include successful challenges to allow a protest procession by taxi
drivers in May 1998. There was an attempt to prevent food vendors from marching against
a curtailment of their stands, and a declaration that no more than 30 people could assemble
at any one time on the steps of City Hall. In October 1998 the October 22 Coalition, who
were planning a protest against police brutality, were refused a permit to march. The
decision was overturned by a Federal Court judge. The judge ruled that the refusal of the
permit was a suppression of their First Amendment Rights and that the decision to refuse
the permit had more to do with the protesters' message than any likely excessive traffic
congestion (Kit Roane 'Federal Judge Orders City to Allow a Rally Against Police
Brutality', New York Times, 22 October 1998:Bl). The City appealed the decision.
However, three Federal court judges upheld the right to hold the march (Kit Roane
'Permitted By Court, 1,000 March Against Police Brutality', New York Times, 23 October
l 998:B3 ). In August 1998 a permit was refused to hold the Million Youth March in Harlem<
A Federal Court judge ruled that the refusal was unconstitutional and that the rules in
relation to granting permits were 'breathtaking in their lack of standards' (Abby
Goodnough, 'Judge Rejects Effort to Block Harlem March', New York Times, 27 August
l 998:B 1). A later Federal court appeal upheld the right of the rally to take place (Dan Barry
'Harlem Rally to Take Place Within Limits', New York Times, 2 September 1998:Bl).
The policing of demonstrations and marches in the city has also been the subject of
complaints about police concerning violence, provocation, the refusal to negotiate with
organisers and widespread arrests. Immediately prior to the Million Youth March in Harlem
MARCH 1999
CONTEMPORARY COMMENTS
301
the Police Commissioner announced plans to 'saturate the site' with police and to promptly
clear the streets at 4pm. The rally ended in violence when a police helicopter swooped low
over the crowd and police in riot gear stormed the stage to shut down the meeting three
minutes after the allotted time for the event had expired. The event had attracted 6,000
attendees and 3,000 police. Numerous policing experts criticised the police handling of the
event, particularly the aggressive tactics and refusal to negotiate. Professor Lawrence
Sherman described the tactics as the application of zero tolerance policing to crowd control
(Kit Roane, 'Huge Deployment of Police Planned for Harlem Rally', New York Times, 5
September 1998: Al; Abby Goodnough, 'Giuliani and Organisers of Rally Clash Over Use
of Force by Police', New York Times, 7 September 1998:Al, B4).
A march and vigil over the killing in Wyoming of gay college student Matthew Shepard
resulted in the arrest of more than 100 people in October 1998. Police defended the arrests
by saying that the organisers had failed to get a permit. Rally organisers said the police
refused to talk or negotiate with them. In fact the rally' s organisers and marshals were
arrested at the beginning of the march. As the march continued demonstrators were batoned
by police and charged by mounted police (Michael Cooper, '60 Arrested in Rally Against
Bias Crimes', New York Times, 20 October 1998:B3; John Kifner, 'Protesters Say Police
Created Havoc at Rally' New York Times, 21 October 1998:B5).
Zero tolerance policing has also involved the use of various ordinances such as New
York's City Parks Department regulations. The New York Civil Liberties Union
successfully argued that summons for violating regulations issued against three Socialist
Worker's Party members for 'unlawful solicitation' and 'unlawfully assembly, meeting and
exhibition' violated their First Amendment rights. The three party members has been
collecting signatures for a petition in a City park. Besides issuing them with summons, the
NYPD also seized political literature and other material. The court dismissed the summons
and ordered the police to return the material ('New York Mayor No Friend to First
Amendment, NYCLU Says at Independence Day Rally' ACLU news, 4 July 1998,
www.aclu.org/news/n070498a.html).
Similar regulations were used to prosecute members of the All Saints Lutheran Church
who were distributing condoms as part of their HIV I AIDS education program in the South
Bronx. The court held that the prosecutions vioiated 1.hc First Arnendment. Three members
of the National Organisation of Women were prosecuted for 'unlicensed general vending'
for distributing and selling various pro-choice and feminist material during the annual Gay
Pride Parade ('New York Mayor No Friend to First Amendment, NYCLU Says at
Jndependence Day Rally' ACLU news, 4 July 1998, www.aclu.org/ncws/n070498a.html).
Police strategics have included greater use of CCT\t. This has occurred in various public
areas such as Washington Square where it was aimed at deterring small scale drug·-dealing.
as well as in some housing estates ('New York City Residents Rally against Video
Cameras', New York Times, 2 February 1998). In addition to the use of CCTV, police tactics
in Washington Square have involved completely sealing off the park during operations,
thus detaining all people there at the time. After a legal challenge by the Civil Liberties
Union, the NYPD has adopted a policy whereby they will no longer completely seal off city
parks, but at least leave one exit open. The sealing off of particular areas has not only
included parks and squares, but also involved neighbourhood areas. In these instances,
mobile command posts have been established (using police from outside the precinct) to
allow for police 'sweeps' through the area. Residents are forced to remain in doors. This
strategy is referred to as 'barricading' - 'in which an entire block is laid siege to for weeks
302
CURRENT ISSUES IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE
VOLUME 10 NUMBER 3
on end' (Asche 1998:4). These type of operations have generally required a greater level of
police surveillance, including an increased use of police helicopters.
The greater control of street offences has seen the movement of some illegal behaviour
into new domains. For example, the crackdown on the selling of drugs at the street level has
resulted in greater drug dealing in private premises. As the drug market has reorganised
itself to deal with police pressure, the exchange of drugs is more likely to occur indoors.
One result has been the development of more intimate relationships between buyers and
sellers, which has also made the work of undercover police far more difficult.
A further result of this has been a dramatic increase in the number of police raids on
houses. And a result of more raids on private apartments and houses has been an increase
in the number of raids on the wrong premises. Between 1994 and 1997 there was a 50%
increase in the number of people who required reimbursement for damage caused as the
result of wrongful police raids. One of the more disturbing aspects of these bungled raids
has been the refusal of the Police Commissioner to apologise to the victims and to
acknowledge that the raids were errors. The Administration's view has been that if the
police raid a house or apartment identified by an informer, and it turns out to be the wrong
house, then the police have acted correctly 3
The pressure on police to maintain arrest rates for drugs which were set in the mid 1990s,
has intensified the concentration on minor drug dealing, as well as turning attention to the
customers. Researchers noted one heroin user who had never been arrested for drug-related
offences since beginning use in the 1970s, was arrested five times for drug possession
between November 1996 and May 1997. Other innovations in drug distribution have
involved the use of delivery services where an ordered is placed by telephone and a bicycle
messenger delivers the drugs (Hamid, et al 1997:383-384).
Sex work has also changed since the introduction of zero tolerance policing. The police
crackdown on street prostitution began in 1994 with more than 9,500 prostitutes and clients
arrested. Since that time there are significantly fewer street workers. However, the sex trade
has moved largely onto the Internet where agencies and individual workers can operate with
relative safety from police intervention. According to the operator of Redlightnet, an online clearinghouse for the sex trade, the decline of crime in New York and the rapid growth
in tourists and conventions had meant an even bigger market for prostitution (Kit Roane,
'Prostitutes on Wane in New York Streets But Take to Internet', New York Times, 23
February 1998:Al)
It appears that it is the pro-arrest strategy for minor offences which is causing a great deal
of resentment among a cross section of New Yorkers. 4 The pro-arrest strategy has been
stepped-up under Police Commissioner Safir, particularly during 1997 and 1998.
Individuals on bicycles are being stopped, searched, handcuffed and arrested for offences
relating to their bicycles such as riding without a bell, or without a headlight or taillight, or
on the footpath. They often remain in police custody for over 24 hours before appearing in
front of the court. Similarly, men and women have been arrested and held in custody for
having open containers of alcohol at neighbourhood weekend basketball games or for
3
4
John Marzulli 'Cops Delay Reporting Botched Raid', Daily News, 3 March 1998; Kit Roane, 'Bronx Ma
Recounts Abuse by Police in Mistaken Raid', New York Times, 4 March 1998; Kit Roane, 'Once Again
Police Raid Wrong Apartment', New York Times, 21 March 1998; John Marzulli 'Cop Raid Targets Cry
Foul', Daily News, 8 May 1998; Jim Dwyer, 'Safir Not Sorry for Bad Raids', Daily News, I 0 August 1998;
Juan Gonzalez, 'Cops Trampling Families and Rights', Daily News, 19 November 1998.
According to Silverman (1998) summons are used if an individual is carrying a Government-issued photo
identification and has no outstanding warrants.
MARCH 1999
CONTEMPORARY COMMENTS
303
selling such things as peeled oranges (Jim Dwyer, 'The No-Bell Losers. Jail for You if that
Cop Feels Like It', Daily News, 25 October 1998) Others have been caught up in the proarrest strategy for minor traffic offences such as failing to wear a seatbelt. They also can
spend well over 24 hours in custody before being brought before a court (Jim Dwyer, 'Zero
Tolerance, Zero Sense', Daily News, 31July1997).
In the majority of these minor offences no other charges are laid, nor are outstanding
warrants found. Yet part of the strategy behind zero tolerance policing is that by intervening
in less serious offences there is a likelihood that more serious matters will be uncovered.
During the ongoing controversy over the arrest of bicycle riders in late 1998, an analysis
was conducted of 73 people arrested and detained for matters relating to their bicycles. It
was found that 17 people were in possession of drugs and four were carrying firearms. Over
two thirds of the people detained had no other matter before the court except the one relating
to their bicycle (Jim Dwyer, 'Apple's Now Suspect City', Daily News, 1 November 1998).
It is claimed that the most beneficial outcome of zero tolerance policing has been the
decline in the level of crime in New York City. According to the Mayor's Office there has
been a 60% drop in murders, a 12% drop in rapes, a 48% drop in robberies and a 46% drop
in burglaries. Between 1993 and 1997 reported serious offences fell by 44% (Greene 1999,
also IBO 1991). Some of the possible reasons for this, as well as comparative data will be
discussed further below.
The torture of Abner Louima
Abner Louima, a 30 year old Haitian immigrant, was arrested on 9 August 1997 outside a
Brooklyn nightclub following a dispute between police and clubgoers. Witnesses told the
New York Times that Louima was arrested while trying to break-up a fight. He was
allegedly assaulted twice while being transported to the police station. At the station he was
allegedly subjected to racist abuse. In the washroom of the station, one officer then shoved
a wooden stick (believed to be a broom or toilet plunger handle) into Louima's rectum and
mouth. The officer then borrowed gloves from another officer and reportedly carried the
stick covered in excrement and blood around the police station.
Other inmates in the cell where Louima had been placed complained that he was
bleeding. He was held for three hour~ before being transported to hospital Loulma daimcd
that officers threatened to kill him if he made any complaint. Doctors confirmed serious
internal injuries and broken front teeth which were consistent with his allegations of assault.
Louima was hospitalised for two months, The police charg~~s against him were dropped.
No police officer at the station reported the attack. A nurse who treated Louima and
reported the incident to the Internal Affairs Bureau (IAB) did not have her report recorded.
'I11e first officially recorded complaint came from Louima · s parents some 36 hours after the
attack. The IAB did not attend the police station where the attack occurred until 48 hours
after the incident.
During the two weeks following the attack, fourteen officers were suspended or placed
on modified duties. Many of these officers had been the subject of previous complaints of
police brutality. Two officers were charged with aggravated sexual assault, and another two
officers were charged with assault. The officer directly responsible for sodomising Louima
was also charged with assaulting another Haitian male on the same night as the attack on
Lomma. A sergeant was charged with attempting to conceal both assaults. 5
5
For a further discussion of the Louima incident see Human Rights Watch 1998:286-289; 'Abuse Charge
Rocks New York Police Department' ACLU news, 14 August 1997, www.aclu.org/news/w081497c.html.
304
CURRENT ISSUES IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE
VOLUME 10 NUMBER 3
It would be simplistic to argue that the torture of Abner Louima was the result of zero
tolerance policing. However, it is indicative of the types of severe problems within the
NYPD which a strategy of zero tolerance policing has exacerbated: aggressive public order
policing; the routine use of violence and, in extreme cases, torture; and the targeting of
minority groups. Certainly the widespread use of violence against members of minority
groups is a major issue. The New York City Public Advocate claimed that the police torture
of Louima was part of a 'pattern of police abuse, brutality and misconduct' (Human Rights
Watch 1998:382; Greene 1998).
The police-community relations inquiry 1997-1998
A task force to review police-community issues was established by the Mayor of New York
following the alleged beating and torture of Abner Louima. The Mayor's Task Force on
Police-Community Relations comprised 31 members including clergy, the director of the
New York Civil Liberties Union, members of the City council, community leaders, a retired
police chief and lawyers.
The recommendations of the task force were rejected by the Mayor in March 1998. He
criticised the Task Force's majority report and failed to mention the torture of Louima
which been the catalyst for establishing the Task Force. 'Some of the things we've already
done. Some of the things I've opposed in the past, I'll continue to oppose them. And some
of the things are unrealistic and make very little sense' (Dan Barry, 'Giuliani dismisses
police proposals by his task force', New York Times, 27 March 1998: 1). The Mayor
complained that the Task Force had ignored the drop in crime in the city.
Among the recommendations in the majority report were the elimination of the fortyeight hour delay allowed for officers under investigation; the creation of an auditor position
to review the performance of the Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB) and to improve
cooperation by the police department with the CCRB; better screening of police recruits;
bi-lingual or multi-lingual receptionists in precincts that have a large number of residents
who do not speak English; and requiring officers to live in the city in an effort to improve
diversity, and cultural awareness, on the force.
There was also a minority report, authored by three members of the Task Force who
reportedly beJieved the Task Force's majority report was inadequate. Among other
recommendations, the minority report called for the creation of an independent special
prosecutor's office (Human Rights Watch 1998:270; Dan Barry, 'Giuliani dismisses police
proposals by his task force', New York Times, March 27, 1998).
What can be learnt from the New York City example?
The suppression of dissent
The introduction of zero tolerance policing has been accompanied by an attempt to control
dissent, including the desire to ban a range of demonstrations as outlined above. Norman
Siegel, the Director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, noted the following.
I've been here 13 years and my legal director has been here even longer, and we've never
filed as many cases involving one administration. The Mayor's vision of a new New York
is a vision that is more authoritarian and repressive, a vision that it antithetical to our rich
tradition of tolerance for protest and dissent ('New York Mayor No Friend to First
Amendment, NYCLU Says at Independence Day Rally', ACLU News, 4 July 1998,
www.aclu.org/news/n070498a.html).
MARCH 1999
CONTEMPORARY COMMENTS
305
Demonstrations and marches have occurred because of the intervention of the Federal
court which has over-ruled the refusal of permits by the Police Commissioner. However,
the policing strategies which have then been used to control marches and processions have
reflected a hardline, non-negotiated approach. The lessons concerning crowd control learnt
from the demonstrations of the 1960s have been ignored and there is now far greater
likelihood of serious public disorder directed against police.
Police brutality, particularly against racial and ethnic minorities
Police corruption and the use of excessive force has long been recognised as a problem in
the NYPD. The Moll en Commission of Inquiry into corruption in the NYPD in 1994 found
police officers were involved in drug dealing, robberies, assaults, perjury and falsification
of records. It also found a failure by the NYPD to discipline officers accused of brutality.
A 1996 Amnesty International investigation after the Mollen Commission found that
some steps had been taken to tackle corruption within the NYPD. However, police brutality
remained a serious problem. Importantly, Amnesty noted that local community and civil
rights groups reported that aggressive zero tolerance policing policies 'had been
accompanied by unacceptable levels of brutality, especially toward racial minorities'. There
were many cases 'where police officers had used excessive force in response to minor
incidents, including assaulting bystanders for taking photographs or criticising police
treatment of others' (Amnesty International 1996).
The Amnesty report noted that
The evidence suggests that the large majority of the victims of police abuses are racial
minorities, particularly African-Americans and people of Latin American or Asian descent.
Racial disparities appear to be especially marked in cases involving deaths in custody or
questionable shootings, an issue Amnesty International believes should be the focus of
particular inquiry (Amnesty International 1996).
Certainly the police precincts with the highest number of reported complaints against
police are in neighbourhoods with higher proportions of African-American and Latino
residents (Greene 1999). Amnesty reports have continued tu draw attention to the high level
of pnhce killings and the apparent failure to respond to police who are responsible for the
deaths. For example. an unarmed African-American was shot dead in a New York
~upcrmarket on 25 December 1997 by police '\vho said they mistook the keys he was
carrying for a gun. The officer who shot him had been involved in eight prior shootings but
had not been placed on any monitoring program (Amnc~1ty International 1998:27).
Statistics published by the CCRB indicate that minorities are disproportionately the
victims of police abuse -- particularly African-Americans. Half the people who lodged
complaints with the CCRB from January to June 1995 were African-American (50% ), a
quarter were Latino (26% ), while the remainder were either white (21 % ) or 'other' (3%),
including Asian. The CCRB semiannual report for the first half of 1997 noted a similar
trend where African-Americans and Latinos lodged 78% of complaints against police. The
1996 investigation by Amnesty International also revealed that more than two thirds of the
cases of police brutality were African-American or Latino. Most of the police officers
involved were white. Nearly all of the victims in the cases of deaths in custody (including
shootings) reviewed by Amnesty were members of racial minorities.
Similarly. Human Rights Watch noted in a 1998 report that the cost of zero tolerance
policing was revealed by
citizen complaints against more aggressive NYPD officers during the past several years and
continuing impunity for many officers who commit human rights violations despite the
306
CURRENT ISSUES IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE
VOLUME 10 NUMBER 3
recent reorganisation of both the civilian review board and the police department's internal
affairs bureau ...
There is often a racial or ethnic component to police abuse cases in New York City, with
many incidents also fuelled by language barriers and miscommunication in the culturally
diverse city (Human Rights Watch 1998:268-269).
In November 1998 the New York City Council's Public Safety Committee issued a
report arguing for stronger policies to control police brutality. The Committee's chairperson
noted that
The Department has perpetuated a police culture in which officers may be emboldened to
conduct themselves in a manner that runs contrary to departmental policy, the law and
public interest... It is not a stretch to suppose that officers - such as those implicated in the
Louima incident - felt that they could get away with it (Michael Cooper, 'Stronger Policies
Are Needed to Stem Police Brutality', New York Times, 10 November 1998:Bl).
Increased complaints against police and increased deaths in police custody
Despite reforms following the Mollen Commission, complaints against the police
registered with the CCRB have risen sharply since 1993. The CCRB reported 4,920 new
complaints in 1994, an increase of 37% over the previous year. While complaints cover a
range of alleged abuses from discourtesy to deaths in custody, the largest proportion ( 1,670
complaints) were for excessive force. These had also risen proportionately since 1993. A
further increase of 32% was noted for the first six months of 1995 compared to the first six
months of 1994. Complaints against police recorded by the CCRB continued to rise in 1996.
During early 1997 there was a slight decline in the number recorded. However, it was later
revealed that complaints were being undercounted by the CCRB by around 20% as a result
of a 'clerical error' (Michael Cooper, 'New York Undercounted Civilian Complaints about
Police', New York Times, 11December1997:B 1). After the Louima incident in the later half
of 1997 there was again as increase in the number of complaints lodged. The most recent
figures for the first half of 1998 revealed a 20% increase in complaints compared to the
same period in the previous year (Michael Cooper, 'Complaints against Police in '98 Grow
20%', New York Times, 11June1998:B7).
During the specific period between 1993 and 1996 when Bratton was the Police
Commissioner complaints concerning police misconduct rose by 65% ('ACLU warns of
'Dark Side' of NY Police Plan', The Philadelphia Inquirer, 16 December 1997). In the four
years up to 1998 the filing of civil rights claims against police for abusive conduct had
increased by 75% and they were continuing to increase (Greene 1999).
There is little doubt that the increase in complaints is associated with the introduction of
zero tolerance policing. According to Amnesty International, police have suggested that the
sharp increase in complaints arose as a result of increased arrests and police activity during
the intensive anti-crime drive (known as the 'quality of life initiative' before attracting the
title of 'zero tolerance'). According to police, many complaints arose from more effective
policing and an increase in arrests, rather than genuine abuses. However, the CCRB noted
that most of the complaints arose from encounters with police that did not involve arrests
or persons receiving summonses. Most complainants had no prior complaint history. so
could not be characterised as 'chronic' complainers.
In 1996 the Amnesty delegation were told by several sources, including officials from
the CCRB, that more aggressive policing had led to an increase in complaints of illtreatment. This view was certainly reflected in the complaints statistics noted above. In
addition deaths in custody increased. The NYPD statistics for 1993 and 1994 show a rise in
MARCH 1999
CONTEMPORARY COMMENTS
307
both the number of civilians who died from police shootings (an increase of 35%) and in
the number of people who died in police custody (an increase of 53% ).
Failure to deal with complaints against police
The CCRB is an independent board responsible for dealing with complaints against police.
However, it has no power to take action against police officers - all matters relating to the
disciplining of police officers is conducted by the NYPD. The New York Task Force on
police-community relations reported in March 1998 that the NYPD had taken either no
action, or imposed minimal discipline, in a large proportion of complaints found to be
substantiated by the CCRB. The task force found that 57% of substantiated cases resulted
in no disciplinary action at all; in other cases disciplinary measures were 'slight'. The
CCRB report for 1997 revealed that action was taken in less that one third of cases (89 of a
total 276) referred to the police department for disciplinary action (Amnesty International
1998:45).
The situation of disciplining officers found to have engaged in misconduct was made
even more farcical when, in September 1998, it was revealed that the CCRB had failed to
pass on to the NYPD 108 substantiated cases of police misconduct (Michael Cooper,
'Police Say Panel Withheld Findings Against 108 Officers', New York Times, 2 September
1998: B3).
The failure of the police department to deal with issues of brutality and corruption has
been a constant source of criticism of the City's administration. Some, such as councillor
and chair of the Public Safety Committee, Shelden Leffler, have argued that while zero
tolerance of offending is demanded of the public, there is no zero tolerance approach to
police misconduct ('Got a Police Problem? Keep it to Yourself', New York Times, 29 March
1998; Bob Herbert 'The Stone Wall of Silence', New York Times, 23 July 1998:A25).
The demise of community policing and the further marginalisation of ethnic
and racial minorities
Some criminologists have commented that although Bratton was not antagonistic to the
basic principles of community policing including a commitment to crime prevention,
prohlem-solving and closer community partnerships, the effect of the changes he
commenced in the NYPD has been to undermine community policing approaches (Greene
1999:4 ). While managerial changes devolved power to the local command level, the
enforcement strategies which were embarked upon were those of a traditional 'la 1N and
order' crackdown, and were not developed in partnership with local communities.
Both the general police crackdown in neighbourhoods and the hardline taken against
demonstrations and marches shows that there is no negotiation of who is arrested or what
they are arrested for. The failure to negotiate and the failure to deveJop partnerships with
communities in relation to their policing needs reflects a substantial departure from
community policing principles.
The NYPD does not reflect the ethnic and racial composition of New York City where
a little over 40% of the population are white, 29% black, 24% Latino and the remainder
predominantly Asian American. The large majority of NYPD officers are white. In 1995
the racial distribution of the NYPD was 72% white, 15% Latino, 11 % African-American
and 2% of other ethnicities. The NYPD is also comparatively non-representative by United
States standards - in a 1992 study New York was ranked last among 50 cities surveyed to
see how well police departments reflected the racial make-up of their populations.
308
CURRENT ISSUES IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE
VOLUME 10 NUMBER 3
The separation of police officers from the community they police is further accentuated
when it is noted that most NYPD officers live in the suburbs outside the city. Amnesty
International ( 1996) has noted that some critics of the department allege that this has
contributed to a sense of alienation and tension between the police and the inner-city
communities in which they work.
The cultural and spatial separation of police from the communities in which they work
is further reflected in the lack of confidence which minority groups have in the police. A
New York Times poll in October 1997 found that 82% of blacks and 71% of Hispanics felt
the police did not treat whites and blacks in New York City with equal fairness. The poll
reflected the findings of other studies and was taken several years after the introduction of
zero tolerance policing in the city.
Value for money?: the relationship between policing levels and crime reduction
Zero tolerance policing is a resource intensive policing strategy. It requires high staffing
levels to achieve the necessary level of direct law enforcement on the streets. Therefore, it
is fair to ask whether citizens get value for money from the increased number of police
necessary to operate a zero tolerance policing strategy. Does the increase in resources
actually lead to a reduction in the crime rate?
As noted previously the size of the NYPD increased dramatically during the first half of
the 1990s. The city also experienced a 46% reduction in the crime rate during the same
period (1990-1996). San Diego is a city with a similar crime index rating as New York. 6
During the same period it achieved over 40% reduction in the crime rate with a 1% increase
in its per capita police staffing levels (IBO 1998). San Diego restructured its police
department along a community policing model which stressed problem solving and policecommunity partnerships for reducing crime. In contrast to the New York experience the
drop in crime rates in San Diego was achieved at the same time as the number of arrests
between 1993 and 1996 actually declined by 15%. Complaints against police for
misconduct also fell. San Diego police also made greater use of new technologies in crime
mapping and police intelligence in locating consistent areas of high crime. However, they
were able to utilise the new technologies within a context of community policing (Greene
1999).
The Independent Budget Office (IBO) for the City of New York provided comparative
analysis to the City Council's Committee on Public Safety on differing rates of policing and
crime rates in the 25 largest United States cities. The IBO found that many other cities
achieved significant reductions in the crime rate with either much smaller per capita police
staff levels or with actual reductions in police staff levels.
• San Diego achieved a 40% drop in the crime rate with a 1% increase in per capita police
staffing levels
• Dallas achieved a 39% drop in the crime rate with a decline in the per capita police
staffing levels of between 2 and 3%
• Pittsburgh achieved a 36% drop in the crime rate with a 6% increase in per capita police
staffing levels
• El Paso achieved a 33% drop in the crime rate with a 5% increase in per capita police
staffing levels
• Miami achieved a 28% drop in the crime rate with a decline in the per capita police
staffing levels of over 11 %
6
An index based on the rate of serious offences which compares and ranks 189 of the largest United States
cities.
MARCH 1999
•
CONTEMPORARY COMMENTS
309
Seattle achieved an 18% drop in the crime rate with a decline in the per capita police
staffing levels of 6% (IBO 1998).
Based on the 1996 FBI Crime Index figures, New York had the third lowest crime rate
of the 25 largest United States cities. However, it had the second highest (after Washington)
per capita police staff levels. The two big cities with lower crime rates than New York are
Indianapolis and San Jose. By way of comparison with New York, these two cities also have
the lowest per capita police staff levels of the 25 largest cities. In Indianapolis there are 13
police officers for every 10,000 residents, and in San Jose there are 16 police officers for
every 10,000 residents. In New York there are 53 police officers for every 10,000 residents.
In San Diego where there was dramatic reduction in crime rates and a small increase in the
policing levels, the per capita policing level is 17 per 10,000 - less than a third of New
York's (IBO 1998).
The relationship between the level of policing and the level of crime in a community is
by no means clear. Some cities have both low crime rates and low per capita policing levels.
Others have high crime rates and high police staffing levels. In addition some cities have
achieved significant reductions in crime without embarking on a zero tolerance policing
strategy with the associated increase in police staff levels.
Has zero tolerance policing reduced crime?
As noted above, proponents of zero tolerance policing point to the decline in the crime rate
in New York as proof of the success of the strategy. However, there are doubts that the
falling crime rate in the city during this period was simply attributable to zero tolerance
policing given that many other large United States cities experienced similar declines,
although using different policing strategies and with dramatically different levels of
policing. Nationally the incidence of serious violent crime and property crime declined in
the United States during the first half of the 1990s. National victimisation surveys show a
decline in homicide, rape, robberies, aggravated assaults and property crime. Not all large
cities or states recorded a fall. However, there appears to be no correlation between whether
zero tolerance policing strategies were introduced, or indeed whether 'three strikes'
legislation and mandatory minimum prison terms were mtroduced, and the decline in crime
rates (Greene ! 999).
A range of demographic, social and economic factors, as well as some law enforcement
strategies such as great.er control on handguns, have likely contributed to the decljning
levels of particular types of violent crime. Economic growth, reduced levels of
unemployment and greater community-based activities to reduce crime are likely to have
had an effect on crime levels (IBO 1998; Greene ] 999). There have also been significant
changes in the pattern of drug use including the decline in the use of crack-cocaine. An
ongoing study by Hamid, et al, ( 1997) of heroin use in New York has found that young
African-Americans are avoiding both heroin and cocaine. Even licit drugs are viewed with
disfavour. 7 Others have argued that there is a direct connection between the drop in the
murder rate in New York and the decline in the crack cocaine epidemic (Dixon 1998:97).
Local accountability, crime reduction and the falsification of records
Zero tolerance policing has relied on new information technologies which provide localised
assessment of the nature and incidence of crime and provide for the targeting of police
7
'Equally profound changes have occurred in other aspects of their lives. For example, they commit far fewer
crimes or acts of violence than formerly ... At the same time, they have redoubled their efforts to complete
their education, find jobs and participate in communal activities' (Hamid, et al 1997:378).
310
CURRENT ISSUES IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE
VOLUME 10 NUMBER 3
resources at the local level. They also provide the opportunity for police managers to place
considerable pressure on local area police commanders to demonstrate results in reducing
crime or increasing the number of arrests.
The experience in the United States appears to be an upsurge in falsifying crime reports
designed to demonstrate a reduction in the number of crimes being committed in particular
areas. Recent media reports have suggested manipulation of crime data (usually by
downgrading the nature of the crime when it is recorded) in a number of cities where
commanders have felt the pressure to show ever-decreasing crime rates (Fox Butterfield,
'As Crime Falls, Pressure Rises to Alter Data', New York Times, 3 August 1998).
Nicholl ( 1997) provides a selection of quotes from NYPD officers which reflect the
distorting influence which zero tolerance policing and CompStat have had on policing:
CompStat is the tail wagging the dog. I am trying to build relationships with my community
so my crime rates are increasing because there is more confidence in reporting crime to us.
But I then get beaten over the head at CompStat.
Robbery patrol hours and the number of verticals are more important than dealing with
domestic violence and rape.
You try reporting a crime to the station - they don't answer the phone, so their numbers are
distorted because people just give up.
I am not accepting this as an assault report - no-one gets their ribs cracked by a hairbrush.
Get rid of it.
We have to find more larceny reports - if we only have three this week, they will expect us
only to have two next week.
And from a lieutenant, 'I spend all my time counting crime reports and checking we are not
recording too many. I don't get to go out on patrol with my officers any more' (Nicholl
1997:5).
She adds, These are quotes from real cops in NYPD who have had to operate to CompStat
and under the fear of being caught out with high crime figures. It strikes me this is wholly
predictable - the consequence of a police department driven by fear of being embarrassed if
they do not reduce the levels of crime. Crime statistics are notoriously unscientific. They
are made even harder to make sense of if there is tomfoolery going on with the way crime
figures are recorded (Nicholl 1997:5).
Conclusion
There are highly divergent views within police services concerning the merits of zero
tolerance policing - it would be highly misleading to view all senior police as favourably
disposed to the idea of zero tolerance policing. To a greater extent it has been the overtly
political use of the concept of zero tolerance policing which is alarming. Many of the
proponents of zero tolerance policing present a naive and public relations-inspired view of
policing in New York City. The purpose of this paper has been to raise questions around
such a sanitised view.
In addition the experience of New York also provides a useful framework for considering
criminological arguments against zero tolerance policing. These augments can be
summarised as follows. 8
8
Some of these points can be found in a various articles including (Burke 1998: Dixon 1998; Greene 1999;
Nicholl 1997; Palmer 1997; Poilard 1997; Wadham 1998}.
MARCH 1999
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
~
ill
•
•
•
CONTEMPORARY COMMENTS
311
There is a lack of evidence of any direct causal link between zero tolerance policing
and declining crime figures. In some United States jurisdictions the same reduction in
levels of crime are being achieved through other policing strategies. The pressure
placed on local commanders to show ongoing reductions in crime has lead to concern
about falsification of crime statistics.
Zero tolerance policing is resource intensive. It requires either increased police
numbers or the allocation of existing resources away from other areas of enforcement.
Thus zero tolerance policing strategies are seen as invariably short-term and expensive.
Zero tolerance policing emphasises offences in public places - street offences. It is
apparently not concerned with other and potentially more major areas of violence such
as domestic violence, nor other facets of property crime such as fraud. The notion of
'quality of life' is itself defined to only include a narrow section of 'public' life.
Corporate crime and environmental crime, for example, have large scale effects on
'quality of life'. Crimes which occur in the private sphere (such as domestic violence)
are not seen as 'quality of life' issues at all.
Zero tolerance policing represents a return to pro-active policing strategies (common
in Britain prior the inner city riots of the early 1980s, and common in parts of Australia
during the 1980s and early 1990s, particularly with the use of tactical response police).
Zero tolerance policing may increase the level of public disorder because it is proactive. It contradicts the results of major inquiries into public disorder such as the
Scarman inquiry in the UK which stressed policing based on community consent, trust
and participation. It will also worsen relations between particular communities and
police.
Zero tolerance policing undermines principles of community policing including
commitments to crime prevention, problem-solving and closer community
partnerships. In this sense, zero tolerance policing is antithetical to policing by consent
- the supposed hallmark of policing in a democracy. Policing priorities are defined
external to the community.
Zero tolerance policing strategies have been consistently implicated with violations of
civil and political rights.
By targeting street offences, zero tolerance policing is aimed at essentially the poor and
the homeless. Racial and ethnic minorities are also concentrated in these groups. Zero
tolerance policing will lead to greater discrimination - either directly through the
targeting of minorities or indirectly through their gTeater presence among those
arrested,
Zero tolerance policing will lead to far greater levels of criminalisation. In particular,
minority groups which already have large proportions of their male population with
criminal records will sec even greater degrees of criminalisation. 1bis will further
compound social and economic marginalisation.
Zero tolerance policing will bring about an increase in complaints about police
misconduct and brutality particularly from minority groups.
Zero tolerance policing will require greater court resources to deal with increased
arrests; it will impact eventually on the prison population (through greater
criminalisation, increased fine defaulters and sentences of imprisonment).
Zero tolerance policing rests on a spurious assumption that the law is neutral and can
be enforced in all situations - that complete enforcement is a possibility. However,
public order and the actions which constitute disorder are broadly defined and open to
constant interpretation and discretionary decisions by police. By pretending that zero
tolerance is possible, the more important question of who gets aITested is obscured.
312
CURRENT ISSUES IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE
VOLUME I 0 NUMBER 3
The experience of zero tolerance policing in New York shows that these issues and
arguments are matters of very real concern, and go to the heart of the nature of relationship
between police and the social and political communities which are the subjects of policing.
Chris Cunneen
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Sydney
REFERENCES
Amnesty International (1996) United States of America: Police Brutality and Excessive
Force in the New York City Police Department, Amnesty International Report, AMR 51/
36/96 [http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/aipub/1996/AMR/25103696.htm]
Amnesty International 1998, United States of America: Rights for All, Amnesty
International Report, AMR 51/35/98 [http://www.rightsforall-usa.organisations].
Asche, A (1998) Zero Tolerance Policing. Preliminary Report, Report to the Legislative
Assembly, Darwin, 18 August 1998.
Bratton, W (1998) Turnaround, Random House, New York.
Burke, R (ed) (1998) Zero Tolerance Policing, Perpetuity Press, Leicester.
Burke, R (1998) 'A contextualisation of zero tolerance policing strategies' in Burke, R (ed)
Zero Tolerance Policing, Perpetuity Press, Leicester.
Dennis, N (ed) (1997) Zero Tolerance: Policing in a Free Society, Institute of Economic
Affairs, London.
Dixon, D (1998) 'Broken Windows, Zero Tolerance and the New York Miracle', Current
Issues in Criminal Justice, vol 10, no 1, pp 96-106.
Gibbons, S (1996) 'Reclaiming the Streets', Police Review, vol 104, no 5386, 13
September, pp 18-21 .
Gibbons, S (1997) 'Zero Tolerance', NSW Police News, vol 77, no 7, pp 25-26.
Greene, J (1999) 'Zero Tolerance: A Case Study of Police Policies and Practices in New
York City', Crime and Delinquency, (forthcoming).
Hamer, J (1997) 'Zero Tolerance Policy in the USA', New Law Journal, vol 147, no 6792,
16 May, pp 737-738
Hamid, A, Curtis, R, McCoy, K, McGuire, J (1997) 'The Heroin Epidemic in New York
City: Current Status and Prognoses', Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, vol 29, no 4, pp 375391.
Henderson, C & Reder, R (1997) 'Zero Tolerance Policing in Hillsborough County', Police
Chief, vol 63, no 2, February 1997, pp 54-55.
Howe, S (1997) 'Kelling's Law', Policing Today, vol 3 no 4, pp 17-19.
MARCH 1999
CONTEMPORARY COMMENTS
313
Human Rights Watch (1998) Shielded From Justice: Police Brutality and Accountability in
the United States, Human Rights Watch, New York.
Independent Budget Office (IBO), City of New York (1998) Correspondence with the New
York City Council Committee on Public Safety, 16 March 1998, 11May1998. On file with
author.
Kelling, G & Coles, C (1997) Fixing Broken Windows, Touchstone, New York.
Morgan, Rand Newburn, T (1997) 'Tough on Zero Tolerance', New Statesman, vol 126,
no 4336, 30 May, p 14.
Nicholl, C (1997) 'Zero Tolerance', Paper presented at a conference in Manchester, 24
March 1997, unpublished.
Palmer, D (1997) 'When Tolerance is Zero', Alternative Law Journal, no 22, pp 232-236.
Pollard, C (1997) 'Zero tolerance: short term fix, long term liability' in Dennis, N (ed) Zero
Tolerance: Policing in a Free Society, Institute of Economic Affairs, London.
Potter, K (1996) 'Zero Tolerance', Police Review, vol 104, no 5378, 19 July 1996, pp 18-20.
Rutherford, A (1997) 'The Government, Crime and Public Order', New Law Journal, vol
147, no 6797, 20 June, pp 932-933.
Silverman, E (1998) 'Below Zero Tolerance: The New York Experience', in Burke, R (ed)
Zero Tolerance Policing, Perpetuity Press, Leicester.
Wadham, J (1998) 'Zero tolerance policing: striking the balance, rights and liberties' in
Burke, R (ed) Zero Tolerance Policing, Perpetuity Press, Leicester.
Wilson, J and Kelling, G (1982) 'Broken Windows', The Atlantic Monthly, vol 249, no 3,
March 1982 pp 29-38.